Homosexuality In The Priesthood.

[OraProMe]

[quote name='Nihil Obstat' date='29 August 2009 - 03:26 AM' timestamp='1251530787' post='1957686']
In case you really did miss it, this was the core of that post.
[/quote]

But all priests have sexual urges and they are all expected to resist them. I really don't see how your comparison works.
Sorry, I am trying

[zunshynn]

I probably will not really get into this discussion too much, but I think there is a different perspective that needs to be considered here... It's true, anyone could fall into sin. Heterosexual priests do... granted there is more of a risk for a priest with homosexual tendencies, because he will live and work with other men constantly... but even if he would never fall, he would need to emotionally be able to relate to the Church in her femininity in a spousal sense.

It's critical for a man in the priesthood to have a clear understanding that he is married to the Church. The Church is feminine. The reason men are ordained to the priesthood is because they are standing in persona Christi, in His spousal relationship to the Church. For whatever reason, this understanding is usually somewhat marred in men who are deeply attracted to other men. The fact is that there is more to our sexuality than its genital expression... it involves a person's entire being.

While no one's sexuality is perfectly in order, other than Our Lord and Our Lady and probably St. Joseph, religious life and the priesthood does demand that a person's sexuality be properly integrated so that they can fully engage in their vocation, so they can give themselves totally to it, in an ordered way. A religious cannot suppress their sexuality, it has to be integrated into their person. Because like I said, there's more to it than the physical aspect. A man needs to relate to his wife as a woman in every facet of their marriage, outside of the physical. Similarly, the priest must be able to relate to the Church as his bride. If someone's sexuality is not integrated into their person in a healthy way, they will not be able to

There's a problem when we start to ignore the Church's feminine attribute, because that is when our undetstanding of the Church's relationship with God, which should be receptive, submissive becomes skewed... There is a distinction between men and women, a distinction which also comes into play in the relationship of God with the Church, because He ordained that men and women should be a sign of that spousal relationship, and it's dangerous to ignore that distinction theologically.

You can't necessarily just be looking for "the person who can hack it" in religious life or the priesthood. Obviously they need to be able to live the life... but that means more than just a question of whether or not he will stray from practicing celibacy. It also means, will he, every day in the midst of his mundane parochial duties, be able to give himself as a father, as a husband?

Do I think, absolutely, they should be barred? Not necessarily, unless the Church emphatically states that. I definitely think it's possible for someone to struggle with homosexual tendencies and come to a point where they are able to integrate their sexuality, in a healthy way, and have a correct understanding of what it means to have a spousal relationship. But I think that needs to be seriously discerned, especially if the person still has strong homosexual attraction. But there is more to consider than just whether or or not they are more likely to fall. A person's sexuality is a huge part of who we are, as human beings... it is a part of every vocation, and it needs to be properly sublimated for it to be fruitful and fulfilling for the Church as a whole, and for the individual.

[Nihil Obstat]

[quote name='OraProMe' date='29 August 2009 - 01:28 AM' timestamp='1251530936' post='1957688']
But all priests have sexual urges and they are all expected to resist them. I really don't see how your comparison works.
Sorry, I am trying
[/quote]
Sorry for jumping on you.

What I was getting at is that SSA is an inclination to act in a way that we find to be disordered (homosexual actions), same as schizophrenia. Schizophrenia is an inclination to act in irrational and sometimes violent ways. Heterosexual attraction is an inclination to act in a way that is not objectively disordered, and therein lies the difference that I alluded to.

Edited August 29, 2009 by Nihil Obstat

[OraProMe]

[quote name='zunshynn' date='29 August 2009 - 03:30 AM' timestamp='1251531022' post='1957691']
I probably will not really get into this discussion too much, but I think there is a different perspective that needs to be considered here... It's true, anyone could fall into sin. Heterosexual priests do... granted there is more of a risk for a priest with homosexual tendencies, because he will live and work with other men constantly... but even if he would never fall, he would need to emotionally be able to relate to the Church in her femininity in a spousal sense.

It's critical for a man in the priesthood to have a clear understanding that he is married to the Church. The Church is feminine. The reason men are ordained to the priesthood is because they are standing in persona Christi, in His spousal relationship to the Church. For whatever reason, this understanding is usually somewhat marred in men who are deeply attracted to other men. The fact is that there is more to our sexuality than its genital expression... it involves a person's entire being.

While no one's sexuality is perfectly in order, other than Our Lord and Our Lady and probably St. Joseph, religious life and the priesthood does demand that a person's sexuality be properly integrated so that they can fully engage in their vocation, so they can give themselves totally to it, in an ordered way. A religious cannot suppress their sexuality, it has to be integrated into their person. Because like I said, there's more to it than the physical aspect. A man needs to relate to his wife as a woman in every facet of their marriage, outside of the physical. Similarly, the priest must be able to relate to the Church as his bride. If someone's sexuality is not integrated into their person in a healthy way, they will not be able to

There's a problem when we start to ignore the Church's feminine attribute, because that is when our undetstanding of the Church's relationship with God, which should be receptive, submissive becomes skewed... There is a distinction between men and women, a distinction which also comes into play in the relationship of God with the Church, because He ordained that men and women should be a sign of that spousal relationship, and it's dangerous to ignore that distinction theologically.

You can't necessarily just be looking for "the person who can hack it" in religious life or the priesthood. Obviously they need to be able to live the life... but that means more than just a question of whether or not he will stray from practicing celibacy. It also means, will he, every day in the midst of his mundane parochial duties, be able to give himself as a father, as a husband?

Do I think, absolutely, they should be barred? Not necessarily, unless the Church emphatically states that. I definitely think it's possible for someone to struggle with homosexual tendencies and come to a point where they are able to integrate their sexuality, in a healthy way, and have a correct understanding of what it means to have a spousal relationship. But I think that needs to be seriously discerned, especially if the person still has strong homosexual attraction. But there is more to consider than just whether or or not they are more likely to fall. A person's sexuality is a huge part of who we are, as human beings... it is a part of every vocation, and it needs to be properly sublimated for it to be fruitful and fulfilling for the Church as a whole, and for the individual.
[/quote]

I really enjoyed reading that. Beautiful.
[i]
the priest must be able to relate to the Church as his bride.[/i]
Would you be able to specify what is involved in relating to the Church as the priests bride?

[OraProMe]

[quote name='Nihil Obstat' date='29 August 2009 - 03:40 AM' timestamp='1251531650' post='1957692']
Sorry for jumping on you.

What I was getting at is that SSA is an inclination to act in a way that we find to be disordered (homosexual actions), same as schizophrenia. Schizophrenia is an inclination to act in irrational and sometimes violent ways. Heterosexual attraction is an inclination to act in a way that is not objectively disordered, and therein lies the difference that I alluded to.
[/quote]

That's okay and thanks for the clarification I get what you're saying now. But from my point of view a homosexual priest who breaks his vow of celibacy and a heterosexual priest who breaks his vow of celibacy aren't that different. Even though one was tempted by an urge that is disordered and one was tempted by an urge that wasn't. So, the way I see it, the sexual orientation doesn't make that much difference because the two (heterosexual and homosexual) both have to deal with lust, even if it's directed at different genders.

Edited August 29, 2009 by OraProMe

[Apotheoun]

I don't think that the Church should ordain any man who self-identifies as "gay."

[iheartjp2]

[quote name='Nihil Obstat' date='29 August 2009 - 03:08 AM' timestamp='1251529713' post='1957678']
How different is it, really?

We can see SSA as an inclination towards a certain type of behaviour that we find unacceptable (doubly so for a priest). Same goes for schizophrenia.
[/quote]

It should be noted that while SSA isn't necessarily a physical cerebral trait, mental illnesses are.

Edited August 29, 2009 by iheartjp2

[OraProMe]

[quote name='Apotheoun' date='29 August 2009 - 10:28 AM' timestamp='1251556132' post='1957769']
I don't think that the Church should ordain any man who self-identifies as "gay."
[/quote]

The poll says homosexuality....

[Apotheoun]

Actually, the poll question does not use the word "homosexuality," but asks if a "homosexual" who has maintained celibacy should be banned from seminary, and my response was . . . yes, he should be denied entry if he self-identifies as "gay."

[OraProMe]

[quote name='Apotheoun' date='29 August 2009 - 10:54 AM' timestamp='1251557647' post='1957788']
Actually, the poll question does not use the word "homosexuality," but asks if a "homosexual" who has maintained celibacy should be banned from seminary, and my response was . . . yes, he should be denied entry if he self-identifies as "gay."
[/quote]

And if he identifies as a man with SSA and agrees completely with what the Catechism says about the issue?

[Apotheoun]

[quote name='OraProMe' date='29 August 2009 - 09:02 AM' timestamp='1251558160' post='1957793']
And if he identifies as a man with SSA and agrees completely with what the Catechism says about the issue?
[/quote]
Why would a man wish to self-identify as "gay", "homosexual", or as one who is afflicted with SSA? I see no reason to make a disordered inclination a defining characteristic of a person.

[Fidei Defensor]

[quote name='Apotheoun' date='29 August 2009 - 09:04 AM' timestamp='1251558278' post='1957795']
Why would a man wish to self-identify as "gay", "homosexual", or as one who is afflicted with SSA? I see no reason to make a disordered inclination a defining characteristic of a person.
[/quote]
Because some people are honest with themselves about the challenges they face in life.

[Apotheoun]

[quote name='fidei defensor' date='29 August 2009 - 09:25 AM' timestamp='1251559540' post='1957815']
Because some people are honest with themselves about the challenges they face in life.
[/quote]
Facing a problem honestly is one thing, but self-identifying as that very problem, as if it is a positive characteristic, is not helpful in the end. Christian faith is about overcoming the disordered passions, and not about embracing them as a self-identifying characteristic.

Edited August 29, 2009 by Apotheoun

[Fidei Defensor]

[quote name='Apotheoun' date='29 August 2009 - 09:28 AM' timestamp='1251559729' post='1957819']
Facing a problem honestly is one thing, but self-identifying as that very problem, as if it is a positive characteristic, is not helpful in the end. Christian faith is about overcoming the disordered passions, and not about embracing them as a self-identifying characteristic.
[/quote]
I'm going to give you the benefit of the doubt because I'm sure you've never experienced this problem, but let me speak from experience and tell you that it's not as simple as saying "oh croutons, I have a disordered passion. oh well." It's not so much "self-identifying," but rather, admitting something that's not just going to go away.

You can't defeat something if you don't know what you're trying to defeat. It's a level of honesty with oneself.

[Nihil Obstat]

[quote name='iheartjp2' date='29 August 2009 - 08:31 AM' timestamp='1251556260' post='1957771']
It should be noted that while SSA isn't necessarily a physical cerebral trait, mental illnesses are.
[/quote]
It's hard to say that, really. On the microscopic level, everything is 'physical' in some way. In schizophrenia, I believe, certain neurotransmitters are produced in excess quantities. So far we don't know if that happens RE: SSA, but on the other hand, we don't know a lot about it anyway. For all we know there might actually be something quantifiable going on, say in the DNA, and we just don't see it at this point.